Meet an atheist ... who believes in God

[LostOne4Ever]

97. ITT

Actual self identifying atheists weigh in and explain why the author of the article does not qualify as an atheist. They use objective evidence such as this objective definition, or this definition, or this definition, or this definition, or even this definition. It also violates every single definition given by atheists in the AA forum.

People who are not atheist try to dispute with a incorrect understanding of what a No True Scotsman fallacy actually is, and nothing but subjective opinions to back up their claims. Many of which use offensive religious terminology which can not, again by definition, can not apply to us.

To be clear, to be a NTS the demarcation can not be an objective rule, rather it is redefining the term to exclude people who normally fall under it by the objective rule....saying a German is not a Scott is not a NTS for example.

No, the author does not qualify as an atheist under ANY definition except his own. If everyone starts redefining every word to suit their own whims, no one would would know what anyone meant by any word and no one would understand anyone else and it would be chaos. A single person, on their own, cannot just redefine a word.

Words have meaning, and under no definition does the articles author count as an atheist.